Appeal court affirms forfeiture of N294m, properties linked to retired general
The court of appeal in Lagos has affirmed the final forfeiture of over N293.97 million, multiple landed properties and investment assets linked to Emmanuel Jebe Atewe, a retired major general, to the federal government.
The appellate court, in a unanimous judgement delivered on Wednesday by Boloukuromo Ugo, the presiding judge, dismissed Atewe’s appeal against the ruling of the federal high court in Lagos.
The court upheld the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) application for the final forfeiture of the assets.
The forfeited assets include N293.97 million, 30,000 MTN-linked units in Stanbic IBTC Asset Management Limited, several properties in Abuja and a commercial property in Yenagoa, Bayelsa state.
The Abuja properties include plots of land at the outer northern Expressway, Jahi, Sabon Lugbe, Kuje, Gaube Farmland Extension II Layout and Sector Centre B Layout, Kuje.
According to the EFCC, the assets were traced to funds reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
The anti-graft agency said its investigations uncovered the alleged diversion of about N8.537 billion released for the operations of the joint task force, Operation Pulo Shield.
The EFCC said the funds were allegedly diverted through a network of companies and individuals acting as proxies, adding that billions of naira were transferred to companies for services that were never rendered.
The commission said some of the funds were subsequently used to acquire assets allegedly linked to Atewe through companies associated with him.
The EFCC said N297 million traced to Cisco Nobots Limited was used in a property transaction in Port Harcourt, from which N290 million was eventually recovered.
The federal high court had earlier granted an interim forfeiture order before making it final after holding that Atewe failed to satisfactorily explain the legitimate source of the assets.
Dissatisfied with the judgement, Atewe appealed, arguing that the forfeiture proceedings were incompetent because he was entitled to the protection of Section 123 of the Armed Forces Act.
He also argued that the proceedings ought not to have commenced while criminal charges against him were pending and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the EFCC’s application.
However, the Court of Appeal resolved all three issues in favour of the EFCC.
The appellate court held that Section 123 of the Armed Forces Act and the decision in General Jafaru Mohammed v. EFCC did not apply to Atewe because he was a retired military officer when the forfeiture proceedings were instituted.
The court noted that Atewe had admitted his retirement in an affidavit before the trial court and held that the statutory protection under Section 123 was available only to serving members of the Armed Forces.
The court further held that Atewe had failed to sufficiently show how he legitimately acquired the assets, observing that his explanations merely referred to honoraria without establishing a lawful source for the properties and other assets.
On Atewe’s argument that the commencement of forfeiture proceedings while his money laundering trial was pending amounted to an abuse of court process, the court of appeal held that the institution of civil forfeiture proceedings during pending criminal proceedings did not constitute an abuse of judicial process.
The appellate court consequently dismissed the appeal for lacking merit and affirmed the Federal High Court’s judgment ordering the final forfeiture of the assets to the federal government.
